Morbi Bridge Collapse: Gujarat HC Issues Notice to Accused, State Govt

Gujarat News, Gujarati News, Latest Gujarati News, Gujarat Breaking News, Gujarat Samachar.

Latest Gujarati News, Breaking News in Gujarati, Gujarat Samachar, ગુજરાતી સમાચાર, Gujarati News Live, Gujarati News Channel, Gujarati News Today, National Gujarati News, International Gujarati News, Sports Gujarati News, Exclusive Gujarati News, Coronavirus Gujarati News, Entertainment Gujarati News, Business Gujarati News, Technology Gujarati News, Automobile Gujarati News, Elections 2022 Gujarati News, Viral Social News in Gujarati, Indian Politics News in Gujarati, Gujarati News Headlines, World News In Gujarati, Cricket News In Gujarati

Morbi Bridge Collapse: Gujarat HC Issues Notice to Accused, State Govt

| Updated: December 4, 2024 16:13

The Gujarat High Court issued a notice on Tuesday to the state government and the accused in the Morbi Bridge collapse case, sought their response to a petition from one of the victims. 

The petition urged the court to suspend the trial until Ajanta Manufacturing Pvt Ltd was included as an accused and the charge of murder was added.

The application “requires consideration,” according to an oral High Court order that was filed late Tuesday. The court also sent notice to the respondents, including the state government and sought a response by January 6. The plea to stay the Morbi trial in a lower court will be heard by the court on that day.

The petition filed by Narendra Parmar, who lost his daughter Dhwani in the tragedy of October 30, 2022, was being heard by the single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep Bhatt.

Through his lawyer Utkarsh Dave, Parmar petitioned the High Court to overturn the Principal Judge of Morbi’s September 17 ruling, which had denied the appeal for a more thorough probe into the Morbi Bridge tragedy.

According to the petition, the Principal Sessions Judge of Morbi denied the application to add Section 302 IPC and to make Ajanta an accused party. 

The prosecution maintained that the victims had “not undertaken any exercise in consultation with the state government for obtaining permission of the court to engage private advocates” and that private advocates “cannot make submissions on behalf of private persons” in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Additionally, Parmar sought interim relief to halt the trial until the outcome of the HC case.

The petition further states that “there is not even an iota of evidence on record, which would show that the accused had intentionally committed the criminal act with knowledge that such an act would, most likely, cause death.” 

The trial court rejected the victims’ petition on these grounds.

Also Read: Shubman Gill, Rahul Tewatia, Mohit Sharma Duped in Rs 6,000 Cr Ponzi Scam

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *